RMT union vote for a national rail strike
Discussion
Gareth1974 said:
I note that the train was delayed by vandalism at Warminster. Not really the fault of the disgraceful railway workers? Prior to that it was on time, as was it's previous working which had started from Waterloo at 0508. Nice early start for the staff on that one.
I see that the train recovered most of the delay due to the efficient staff at Bristol Temple Meads managing to get the train in and out of the station in 3 minutes, allowing the train run on time for the rest of it's journey.
Good work.I see that the train recovered most of the delay due to the efficient staff at Bristol Temple Meads managing to get the train in and out of the station in 3 minutes, allowing the train run on time for the rest of it's journey.
This thread just keeps getting better
Welshbeef said:
S17Thumper said:
For anyone interested in what’s listed this seems to be one of the ads for the night tube recruitment.
Love the “skills” good time keeping. Pretty sure elementary school children are able to fulfil this requirement.
98elise said:
How long does it take to train a driver from "off the street" to fully trained?
That should give us some idea if the pay is justified.
The link I posted above references to ‘ be prepared to complete a 16 week full time training course’That should give us some idea if the pay is justified.
you would presume theres more than that.
S17Thumper said:
98elise said:
How long does it take to train a driver from "off the street" to fully trained?
That should give us some idea if the pay is justified.
The link I posted above references to ‘ be prepared to complete a 16 week full time training course’That should give us some idea if the pay is justified.
you would presume theres more than that.
S17Thumper said:
98elise said:
How long does it take to train a driver from "off the street" to fully trained?
That should give us some idea if the pay is justified.
The link I posted above references to ‘ be prepared to complete a 16 week full time training course’That should give us some idea if the pay is justified.
you would presume theres more than that.
First Group say a year
https://www.firstgroupcareers.com/skillsets/traind...
Gareth1974 said:
S17Thumper said:
98elise said:
How long does it take to train a driver from "off the street" to fully trained?
That should give us some idea if the pay is justified.
The link I posted above references to ‘ be prepared to complete a 16 week full time training course’That should give us some idea if the pay is justified.
you would presume theres more than that.
First Group say a year
https://www.firstgroupcareers.com/skillsets/traind...
16 weeks will be the theory at the beginning learning the rule book, company specific rules, traction knowledge and it's crammed in, tbh I always felt it should be 6 months as it's very intensive with almost no time to let the knowledge sink in, but this is the industry.
Gareth1974 said:
S17Thumper said:
98elise said:
How long does it take to train a driver from "off the street" to fully trained?
That should give us some idea if the pay is justified.
The link I posted above references to ‘ be prepared to complete a 16 week full time training course’That should give us some idea if the pay is justified.
you would presume theres more than that.
First Group say a year
https://www.firstgroupcareers.com/skillsets/traind...
S17Thumper said:
If you look at who is contributing what on this thread it’s basically, in the main, those with a vested interest telling everyone else they're wrong but not really covering off the pay angle 
You need to read it again.‘In the main’ it’s foolish talking about the wages of ASLEF drivers when the thread concerns the RMT union strike action. You’ve been told this a few times now.
From walking off the street to becoming a ‘passed out’ qualified driver can take around 12-18 months. Then follows a period of PQA (post-qualified assessment) which can add a further 24 months to the original 12-18 months. Most companies have a system whereby wages increase over a period of years before you get the full package. The idea it takes weeks from off the street to 60,80 or £100K is about as accurate as most of the nonsense already added to the thread.
Welshbeef said:
Scrimpton said:
There are signallers jobs advertised near me starting from 26k. That doesn't strike me as particularly excessive for the shifts and responsibilities.
Take a look at some supermarket jobs you’d be surprised by the annual package. It feels like the last throws of a firing industry, like mining in the 70’s or heavy manufacturing in the 80’s. I fully support the right to strike and think wage stagnation we have seen over the last 20 years is hugely damaging, but trains seem absolutely perfect for heavy automation and modernisation. It’s going to happen either way, but both managers and employees seem to be making the changes far more painful than they need to be.
Electro1980 said:
It feels like the last throws of a firing industry, like mining in the 70’s or heavy manufacturing in the 80’s. I fully support the right to strike and think wage stagnation we have seen over the last 20 years is hugely damaging, but trains seem absolutely perfect for heavy automation and modernisation. It’s going to happen either way, but both managers and employees seem to be making the changes far more painful than they need to be.
Care to estimate the cost and timescale of this ‘heavy automation’?Will it be added to the existing infrastructure or will the whole lot be ripped out and start from scratch?
What a strange question. No, I don’t care to estimate the costs or provide details. And, no, the fact that I’m not an expert in the procurement and planning of the railways does not mean it’s wrong. There are plenty of existing automated rail transport systems, we are very close to automated cars and commercial airliners, and trains are in a far more controlled environment, with far higher pressures to modernise and far less constraints. What exactly is it that makes it difficult?
98elise said:
How long does it take to train a driver from "off the street" to fully trained?
That should give us some idea if the pay is justified.
The claims seem to be about 2+ years. I reckon there's a lot of theory and 'padding' included in this and wonder if it's not possible to have a junior grade after, say 6-12 months where a new driver is limited to a small number of 'safer' routes. Experience and further training can then progress, with the worthwhile driver added to the resources earlier than seems to be the case currently.That should give us some idea if the pay is justified.
Mr Spoon said:
faa77 said:
98elise said:
valiant said:
And what’s the average salary for a nurse in London?
Not starting salary but the average for a nurse as the poster I replied to mentioned?
And why the heck do people always compare nurses to tube drivers? Is it some sort of metric used to calculate inflation or something? Every bleedin’ time tube or train drivers salaries are mentioned someone brings out the nurses.
Just accept that different professions pay different salaries.
Rail workers get paid more because they work in a monopoly and can blackmail the country. Not starting salary but the average for a nurse as the poster I replied to mentioned?
And why the heck do people always compare nurses to tube drivers? Is it some sort of metric used to calculate inflation or something? Every bleedin’ time tube or train drivers salaries are mentioned someone brings out the nurses.
Just accept that different professions pay different salaries.
If there was any competition unionised rail would fail within a very short space of time.
Unions started out with good intent, but they have developed into a mafia. I'd love to see the back of them.
hole managers/directors then a lot of people wouldn't need to join a Union.I haven't been (or felt the need to be) in a Union for over 30 years (I was in the GMBATU in my first job because they had a closed shop). However I've been in lots of negotiations with Unions for various reasons (Grievances, disciplinaries, pay awards, redundancies). the vast majority of Union reps I've delat with have been honest decent people trying to get a fair outcome for their members. Yes there were some power mad d
heads who thought they were the reincarnation of Red Robbo.On the other side of the coin you have some management who are incentivised to do "more with less" to generate more profits for shareholders which means more bonuses for them. This means changes in T&Cs, working conditions, and employee benefits. Now it's all well and good saying "you should just change jobs" but when there is only one "Employer" in your industry it's not that easy to find "another" job.
Vasco said:
The claims seem to be about 2+ years. I reckon there's a lot of theory and 'padding' included in this and wonder if it's not possible to have a junior grade after, say 6-12 months where a new driver is limited to a small number of 'safer' routes. Experience and further training can then progress, with the worthwhile driver added to the resources earlier than seems to be the case currently.
This already happens, in fact link structure based on competancy was a thing almost as soon as privatisation kicked in. At a large passenger depot with multiple routes it was fairly easy to bring this in, with 7 links the bottom link new drivers would learn 2 or 3 routes and be a lower rate of pay. The pay scale was based on your length of service, from a training rate then to newly qualified , once you had completed one full year solo driving the rate went up annually. This was usually over a three year period, so it took about 5 years to get to the headline rate for the company(this only applies to passenger TOCS). The company I worked for in my final 14 years poached experinced drivers, this was partly down to simple logistics, we were the only passenger company running the length of the country with an annual recruitment of less than 20 in most years also huge route knowledge requirements from day one of driving. It p****d of the other TOCS and I believe this has now changed.Edited by W124Bob on Saturday 28th May 14:23
A500leroy said:
Yep same at ROYAL MAIL, of course a pay increase would be welcome, but we are concerned that they want to remove our sick pay, make our hours annual hours, remove our supplements,later start and finish times (ie starting at midday) and have Sunday working. Then have all new starters on a different contract altogether.
Thats what most unions are really balloting over. Do more for the same (or in real terms less) pay.
Honestly bothered by the bit in bold…. And really not being contentious but is the true role of a union in this day and age to call a strike so that people who would possibly willingly accept the new contracts get the old ones?Thats what most unions are really balloting over. Do more for the same (or in real terms less) pay.
It slightly reminds me of the Fireman/Firefighters striking back in c. Dec 2002/3. The union were demanding something like a 45% pay rise but without that, there were still plenty of applicants for every vacancy. In London, they had something like 500 applicants per vacancy? (It might have been 50 or even 150 but that doesn’t sound Daily Mail enough…)
Slaav said:
Honestly bothered by the bit in bold…. And really not being contentious but is the true role of a union in this day and age to call a strike so that people who would possibly willingly accept the new contracts get the old ones?
It slightly reminds me of the Fireman/Firefighters striking back in c. Dec 2002/3. The union were demanding something like a 45% pay rise but without that, there were still plenty of applicants for every vacancy. In London, they had something like 500 applicants per vacancy? (It might have been 50 or even 150 but that doesn’t sound Daily Mail enough…)
Its a management trick - the existing employees wont be keen on striking for the benefit of the new employees. The new employees are just grateful to get whatever they can so they'll sign up to anything.It slightly reminds me of the Fireman/Firefighters striking back in c. Dec 2002/3. The union were demanding something like a 45% pay rise but without that, there were still plenty of applicants for every vacancy. In London, they had something like 500 applicants per vacancy? (It might have been 50 or even 150 but that doesn’t sound Daily Mail enough…)
Over time the number of employees on the NEW contracts becomes sufficient to enable Mgmt to arbitrarily change the "old" (better) contracts for the long term employees. The "new contract" employees wont be too keen on striking for the benefit of people who are on better T&Cs than them for doing the same job.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff